I have just finished reading "Mind the Gap" by Graeme Codrington and Sue Grant-Marshall which looks at generational theory and how it affects different facets of life. As they admit, generational theory provides broad brush-strokes of description and can't really account for their detail. But their justification of shared formative experiences does make sense.
The one aspect of my generation - the Millenials, or Generation Y - that struck home with me is the desire for life to be about more than about just oneself. They say the Millenials are more civic-driven and community-oriented than other recent generations and are in some ways a throwback to the GI generation that produced leaders like John F Kennedy and Nelson Mandela.
This has to be a positive development, given the nature of the challenges humanity is facing. Many of the current consumer-led problems of waste and wasteful use of resources is going to need dealing with, and soon. A generation who frames their decisions more broadly - whether they be saving, spending, deciding where they work and how they vote - has to be what is needed.
However, the major, dominant generation will remain the Boomers who have dwarved every other generation in size. It is the aging of the Boomers that will drive the demographic problems of the first world - especially Europe - and then move onto China and the developing world. They will also lead for a while longer and certainly influence voting patterns. On the bright side, the book seems to suggest that having been a self-indulgent and profligate generation to begin with, they are now starting to ask questions about their legacy. This combined with the Millenials' civic focus could be what the world needs.
The book pre-dates the financial crisis - though it did predict some form of crisis between 2010 and 2015 - and is as a result a bit too optimistic about trends in the work-place. They expect Millenials to have a lot of latitude for movement but early Millenials are now stuck in the wake of the crisis which may take quite some time to sort itself out. It also suggest that Boomers - and to some extent, Silents - will be able to work longer, mostly on a contractual basis. But in the wake of the crisis, contractual workers are often the first to go.
While I don't subscribe to all the ideas in the book, their chapter on where politics would have to go was almost an exact description of how President Obama would come to power. It argues that after the overly-posed and poised leaders Boomers have been thus far, the younger generations would be looking for someone able to speak from the cuff - and do so, eloquently - and who would make greater use of the Internet. The book argues that Xers are unlikely to ever be that political, but that this kind of approach would certainly work for Millenials who can now vote and do think about the broader perspective.
I do hope the book is right about Millenials being civic-driven as a rule. If we can re-make consumer patterns, political pressures and how corporations are expected to behave, this could go a long way. I have already read elsewhere that one of the major reasons corporations are having to reform their public image is young, bright people won't work for companies with bad images. There will always be people who will sign up for the right pay-cheque but if there are fewer of them and they're not the best or the brightest, this could have a strong effect. And then, of course, once in the organisation, they're more likely to agitate for the company to develop along lines that are better for the 'greater good'. Seeeing that Boomers are running most companies - and are worried about their legacy - this could be a powerful combination.
But will it be in time?
